OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy_Faber

I don't think the silent majority who voted Leave especially saw either option as a panacea, and (stop me if I've said this before) the fact that the vote was offered in the first place showed that the powers that be had NO idea who they were governing

---

Ah yes...the ‘silent majority’, aka...the ‘voice of the people’ (when it suits)...aka...the 37% of the people who voted Leave after the most dishonest and misleading ‘campaign’ in history. Mustn’t forget them...but I do agree with the last bit.

Roger...all the time in the world for you...genuinely, but I do wish you’d make your bloody mind up. You voted ‘Remain’ as far as I remember and have sat on the fence making mischief ever since. Having it both ways has become as much of a Ramjet trait as it is of the Brexiteers.

Thanks Swale...like.

Night all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

Such as?

---

Such as, in my own little world, my only personal experience of eu grants are :

My rich arable farmer friend acquiring a handful of sheep to gain a good handout, also in order to get more lucrative handouts he has to farm using certain restrictions suitable for very large farms, like in France.

Another rich friend who owns 50% of 10M turnover company gets a 350k handout in the year he buys an extra 500k house and a Porsche Macan.

The eu contributed to a local road improvement on the condition that there is a bus lane on the dual carriage way, for 4 buses an hour!

I did say that I HOPED that local decision makers would be better at deciding where the money should go.

Your point about what happened in 2009 destroys your argument somewhat, we had the chance to get rid of them in 2010. Something we can't do with the unelected eu personnel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

Ah yes...the ‘silent majority’, aka...the ‘voice of the people’ (when it suits)...aka...the 37% of the people who voted Leave after the most dishonest and misleading ‘campaign’ in history. Mustn’t forget them...but I do agree with the last bit.

Roger...all the time in the world for you...genuinely, but I do wish you’d make your bloody mind up. You voted ‘Remain’ as far as I remember and have sat on the fence making mischief ever since. Having it both ways has become as much of a Ramjet trait as it is of the Brexiteers.

Thanks Swale...like.

Night all.

---

I did indeed vote remain but at the time I said I was torn and uncertain which was right. The economic argument was a pro remain factor (but the USE, Euroarmy and other Federalist aspects were the anti remain factors).

So fence sitting is in my blood and has always been my achilles heel on this subject - although I prefer to regard it as devil's advocacy.

But cohesion payments do grind my gears - it being third hand foreign aid in disguise....

Roger and I appear to come from roughly the same angle on Brexit, and I don't think its fence sitting, I see it as constantly assessing the bl**dy complex issue based on changes as they occur. I've said before we should have been allowed to vote on a scale 1 to 10 not just in or out.

Meanwhile,

Forbes have voted the UK as the best place to do business in 2018 https://www.forbes.com/#30ec10552254

The government has made a rather smart move of on EU bank Access to The City http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42420829.

The issue of 'the silent majority' is an interesting one, The Guardian have done some interesting work in this area and one of the things they touch on is that 'the majority' have been conditioned by 'the establishment' to keep non-liberal views to themselves, but that conditioning has not had the same impact on what people think or how they act.

A piece on Dutch TV recently showed figures that the UK is out performing the EU...........

I honestly take the above comments on board, I really do and I am quite prepared to accept that both Andy and RR are capable of putting across a more economically coherent argument than me. In this instance though that was not the point.
The point being made was that somehow the EU are untrustworthy and wasteful in comparison to our own home grown politicians and from Arlene Foster to Bernard Jenkin, second homes to duck houses and Hillsborough to Grenfell that simply isn’t true. There is indeed much to find fault with about the EU but to imagine that the collection of ne’er do wells and self interested liars that make up so much of our establishment will be any better is quite delusional imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

I honestly take the above comments on board, I really do and I am quite prepared to accept that both Andy and RR are capable of putting across a more economically coherent argument than me. In this instance though that was not the point.
The point being made was that somehow the EU are untrustworthy and wasteful in comparison to our own home grown politicians and from Arlene Foster to Bernard Jenkin, second homes to duck houses and Hillsborough to Grenfell that simply isn’t true. There is indeed much to find fault with about the EU but to imagine that the collection of ne’er do wells and self interested liars that make up so much of our establishment will be any better is quite delusional imo.

---

I get the point and I agree! I think the point back (clearly not made too well) is that, over time, we could/can vote the shower you refer to out of office (1997 was the prime example of that IMO), we couldn't do the same with the EU wallahs so instead of voting them out the country has voted the country out.

And just to drive another point home, from BBC News...

'The chief executive of Goldman Sachs, Lloyd Blankfein, has suggested holding another referendum on Brexit'.

Mr Blankfein tweeted: "Here in UK, lots of hand-wringing from CEOs over #Brexit... So much at stake, why not make sure consensus still there?"

That, and the rest of the article, show that he for one just isn't in touch, he only needs to look at the latest independent studies to see that sentiment hasn't changed enough to make a difference, no matter what he and another half dozen millionaires sitting round a table guzzling Bollinger think.

I think I need to sit down somewhere dark with my wolfie smith hat on.

Exactly Andy. The corruption, sleaze, waste etc is doubtless just as prevalent domestically as in the EU. BUT the EU is both unelected and unaccountable.

The Commission is not subject to election (the EU Parliament is elected but a toothless tiger). The EU audit has failed to verify the accounts for 20 + years in a row.

That is the difference: its called democracy, something quite lacking in the EU which is perhaps better described as pan national bureaucracy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

I honestly take the above comments on board, I really do and I am quite prepared to accept that both Andy and RR are capable of putting across a more economically coherent argument than me. In this instance though that was not the point.
The point being made was that somehow the EU are untrustworthy and wasteful in comparison to our own home grown politicians and from Arlene Foster to Bernard Jenkin, second homes to duck houses and Hillsborough to Grenfell that simply isn’t true. There is indeed much to find fault with about the EU but to imagine that the collection of ne’er do wells and self interested liars that make up so much of our establishment will be any better is quite delusional imo.

---

I think the point being made is that we are in a position to do something about our politicians unlike those from Brussels.

Also I prefer to have policies designed to suit our country's requirements rather than those lobbied for by leading eu industries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roger_ramjet

Exactly Andy. The corruption, sleaze, waste etc is doubtless just as prevalent domestically as in the EU. BUT the EU is both unelected and unaccountable.

The Commission is not subject to election (the EU Parliament is elected but a toothless tiger). The EU audit has failed to verify the accounts for 20 + years in a row.

That is the difference

---

Sorry, not ‘exactly Andy’ at all. Views on the desireability of another referendum depend entirely on the source. The Independent for example recently suggested that there was a clear move towards such a desire while certain other unmentionable ‘newspapers’ would have people slung out of the country for suggesting such a thing.

I agree that the EU is insufficiently ‘accountable’ but change it, don’t throw a massive strop based on ignorance and stomp off.

Another referendum is probably not the issue, unless it’s compulsory and properly informed it’s as likely to be as wholly counterproductive and divisive as the last one anyway.

As for getting rid of MP’s every 4-5 years...you know that rarely happens. Given our system, complacent MP’s in safe seats would have to commit mass child murder in order to be voted out.